Marriage: Judge not …

To the Editor:

This letter is a response to last weeks published letter, and frankly most every other piece of information I heard, watched or read in print concerning the “Defense of Marriage Amendment.” I am so tired of hearing why this Amendment is so important for our state’s children when half of the “traditional” marriages in this country traditionally fail. I am also tired of many of these same vocal “vote yes” people who believe they hold the biblical or religious moral high ground. Live by the sword – die by the sword, but first go back and read your Bible. The first five books of the bible lay out the “law” for multiple marriages (polygamy). Some top names in the Bible for polygamy: Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon (hundreds of wives and concubines).

But, Randy, the very first couple was Adam and Eve- “one man and one woman”? Well, if we take the bible literally- that’s correct, and if we continue that literal reading we quickly get to the question of who did Adam and Eve’s children marry to populate God’s Earth?- if they were the only family on his Earth? Now, don’t go there- because that would be blasphemous!

But, Randy when Jesus came he made all things New? Please, read Matthew where Jesus speaks of the parable of the ten Bridesmaids/virgins. In this parable, these bridesmaids/virgins were waiting for the arrival of one Bridegroom. Also, in Matthew Jesus says, “I did not come to abolish the Law (Moses) or the prophets, but to fulfill it.” This verse seems fairly clear to me that Jesus’ arrival was not about changing ANY of the Law including- the marriage customs and Laws of polygamy (actually to be precise-polygamy- one male marrying and having sexual relationships with multiple females). (As a side note: the biblical readings of the love between Ruth and Naomi may also spin your head.)

There are at least two sides to every debate and cherry picking religious quotes and/or bible verses do not elevate the ground of which one walks. Let’s all please remember: One man’s freedom of religion is another’s freedom from religion. Law’s in this country should be based on reason alone. The outcome of this vote will, in practice, change nothing concerning Minnesota marriages (same sex marriage is already not legally recognized by Mn authorities).

Just two generations ago this country lay to rest all governmental inter-racial marriage restrictions. Many of the same arguments (or a very close variant) used today in the defense of “traditional” marriage where used in defending the “traditional” segregated marriage lines: “Oh, it’s best for the children …” “God, did not intend…”; “The Bible says…” and etc.

From our vantage point in America today, we would all call those opposing inter-racial marriages bigots.

So, go vote, and “Judge not, lest you be judged.”

Randy Kottke

St. Michael